Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 2 de diciembre a las 13:29 me escribiste:
I'd like to compare the user base and calculate the bugs/users ratio.
I guess GCC's would be orders of magnitude smaller.
And BTW, GCC implements 7 languages (at least 7 languages are present as
bugzilla components: ada, c, c++, fortran, java, objc and objc++), so
doing a rough estimative, 5442/7 ~= 800, less than DMD, which implements
only D.
Seriously Walter, you *can't* possibly compare DMD with GCC, it's almost
funny when you do it =P
My post was in response to the bug *count* being a showstopper. My
point is it's absurd, because you can always slice the data to mean
whatever you want it to mean. For example, many of the "bugs" in the
dmd list are enhancement requests, bugs in the library (not the
compiler), bugs in the documentation (not the compiler), etc.
Sure, but your comparison with GCC just makes things more absurd, not
less. I completely agree with you that bug count (alone) is not a good
measure of compiler quality, I just don't agree with the GCC comparison
to prove it.
I *meant* to show it was absurd by showing the GCC bug list.
I hope you can change the license some time, and you start
encouraging other people involvement more actively, so the number of
contributors to DMD keep growing.
I encourage other people to submit patches. Don has been especially
productive in this. But I still want to be the gateway to getting them
integrated into the trunk, because otherwise I will lose track of how it
works, and because sometimes patches are not quite the right place to
fix the problem, although they are usually close and still very helpful.
